I didnt say i was more impressed, i said he had a better year at least statistically.

So you only care about raw bulk stats? The fact that (leaving out DPI to make you happy) Green averaged 9.19 yards per target and a TD every 16.4 targets compared to 8.35 yards per target and a TD every 20.6 targets for Q doesn't make any case for Green possibly having the better statistical season? At what point would the number of targets matter to you? If their numbers were the same but Green only had 100 targets and Q had 200, would you still really be arguing Q's season was better statistically just because he get the ball thrown his way so much more? I understand that efficiency isn't everything, but you can't completely ignore it either.

I didnt say i was more impressed, i said he had a better year at least statistically.

So you only care about raw bulk stats? The fact that (leaving out DPI to make you happy) Green averaged 9.19 yards per target and a TD every 16.4 targets compared to 8.35 yards per target and a TD every 20.6 targets for Q doesn't make any case for Green possibly having the better statistical season? At what point would the number of targets matter to you? If their numbers were the same but Green only had 100 targets and Q had 200, would you still really be arguing Q's season was better statistically just because he get the ball thrown his way so much more? I understand that efficiency isn't everything, but you can't completely ignore it either.

But he didnt have 200 targets. those YPT may add substance to your argument but it doesnt change the fact that Boldin had a better rookie season. He had over 300 yards more - thats a big deal.If he had 50 targets more but then only had 100 yard more then you have a point. AJ Green in his rookie season had a catch rate of 56.5 while Q had 56.4.Like you said lets consider other factors, Boldin''s team went 4-12 if im not mistaken and the bengals went 9-7. Im not ignoring it, but its not going to be centre of my argument like it is to yours._________________

I didnt say i was more impressed, i said he had a better year at least statistically.

So you only care about raw bulk stats? The fact that (leaving out DPI to make you happy) Green averaged 9.19 yards per target and a TD every 16.4 targets compared to 8.35 yards per target and a TD every 20.6 targets for Q doesn't make any case for Green possibly having the better statistical season? At what point would the number of targets matter to you? If their numbers were the same but Green only had 100 targets and Q had 200, would you still really be arguing Q's season was better statistically just because he get the ball thrown his way so much more? I understand that efficiency isn't everything, but you can't completely ignore it either.

But he didnt have 200 targets. those YPT may add substance to your argument but it doesnt change the fact that Boldin had a better rookie season. He had over 300 yards more - thats a big deal.If he had 50 targets more but then only had 100 yard more then you have a point. AJ Green in his rookie season had a catch rate of 56.5 while Q had 56.4.Like you said lets consider other factors, Boldin''s team went 4-12 if im not mistaken and the bengals went 9-7. Im not ignoring it, but its not going to be centre of my argument like it is to yours.

You just said a little while ago that it wasn't more impressive, but now it's better? Why? Because he got thrown the ball more because his team was awful, had to pass because they were always behind, and thus threw him the ball a ton? There's a reason his numbers weren't actually good when they won. I really just need to walk away. It's like talking to a brick wall. Seriously, what is your argument beyond the fact that Q had more yards? Because that only happened because of how much more he was thrown the ball.

You just said a little while ago that it wasn't more impressive, but now it's better? Why? Because he got thrown the ball more because his team was awful, had to pass because they were always behind, and thus threw him the ball a ton? There's a reason his numbers weren't actually good when they won. I really just need to walk away. It's like talking to a brick wall. Seriously, what is your argument beyond the fact that Q had more yards? Because that only happened because of how much more he was thrown the ball.

So impressive means better? I didnt know that. It doesnt matter if he was thrown the ball more, he was still a rookie and was highly productive. I dont know why the amount of targets should be used against him because he still had over 300 yards more and almost 40 more receptions. AJ Green was more impressive because he had a rookie QB throwing him the ball but Q still had a better season - i dont know why youre struggling to grasp that.

His team was awful? So were the texans before 2011 but we still considered Andre Johnson the best WR in football. So please tell me how that argument works. You really are not realising the content of your argument._________________

You just said a little while ago that it wasn't more impressive, but now it's better? Why? Because he got thrown the ball more because his team was awful, had to pass because they were always behind, and thus threw him the ball a ton? There's a reason his numbers weren't actually good when they won. I really just need to walk away. It's like talking to a brick wall. Seriously, what is your argument beyond the fact that Q had more yards? Because that only happened because of how much more he was thrown the ball.

So impressive means better? I didnt know that. It doesnt matter if he was thrown the ball more, he was still a rookie and was highly productive. I dont know why the amount of targets should be used against him because he still had over 300 yards more and almost 40 more receptions. AJ Green was more impressive because he had a rookie QB throwing him the ball but Q still had a better season - i dont know why youre struggling to grasp that.

His team was awful? So were the texans before 2011 but we still considered Andre Johnson the best WR in football. So please tell me how that argument works. You really are not realising the content of your argument.

So you're saying a more impressive season can worse than a less impressive one? That just makes no sense to me. The more impressive season is the better season.

Are you even serious on the Andre Johnson question? The Texans were horrible? I mean they finished .500 or better from 2007-2009, which just so happens to be when people started ranking Andre Johnson so highly. As for what separates that from Boldin's rookie season, Johnson actually performed in wins, unlike Boldin. He's averaged 89.4 yards in wins compared to 70.5 yards in losses. How do you not understand the difference between that and Boldin averaging 51.5 yards in wins and 97.6 yards in losses? One of them is actually contributing to his teams success, while the other is just racking up stats in losses.

You just said a little while ago that it wasn't more impressive, but now it's better? Why? Because he got thrown the ball more because his team was awful, had to pass because they were always behind, and thus threw him the ball a ton? There's a reason his numbers weren't actually good when they won. I really just need to walk away. It's like talking to a brick wall. Seriously, what is your argument beyond the fact that Q had more yards? Because that only happened because of how much more he was thrown the ball.

So impressive means better? I didnt know that. It doesnt matter if he was thrown the ball more, he was still a rookie and was highly productive. I dont know why the amount of targets should be used against him because he still had over 300 yards more and almost 40 more receptions. AJ Green was more impressive because he had a rookie QB throwing him the ball but Q still had a better season - i dont know why youre struggling to grasp that.

His team was awful? So were the texans before 2011 but we still considered Andre Johnson the best WR in football. So please tell me how that argument works. You really are not realising the content of your argument.

So you're saying a more impressive season can worse than a less impressive one? That just makes no sense to me. The more impressive season is the better season.

Are you even serious on the Andre Johnson question? The Texans were horrible? I mean they finished .500 or better from 2007-2009, which just so happens to be when people started ranking Andre Johnson so highly. As for what separates that from Boldin's rookie season, Johnson actually performed in wins, unlike Boldin. He's averaged 89.4 yards in wins compared to 70.5 yards in losses. How do you not understand the difference between that and Boldin averaging 51.5 yards in wins and 97.6 yards in losses? One of them is actually contributing to his teams success, while the other is just racking up stats in losses.

No a more impressive season doesnt always mean a better season. For example Julio Jones rookie season was more impressive than somebody like Stevie Johnson because he was a rookie and had no offseason but Stevie Johnson had a better year. Or Cam Newton's season was more impressive then somebody like Tony Romo because he played great for a rookie despite having no off season. See more impressive doesnt necessarily always mean better.

Maybe not horrible but they werent a good team, they were bad defensively. Also with boldin, is that his fault?are you saying they were garbage yards? Just because youre on a bad team, it doesnt mean youre not doing your job. He did his job for the most part but clearly his team was not so good. AJ Green isnt the only reason why the bengals were 8-8, i think its mostly to do with their defense. And also who is to say that some of AJ Green's yardage werent from garbage.
Im sorry you dont put up almost 1400 yards and over 100 receptions and not be impressed or not regard that as a better season than 1058 yards and 65 receptions with 7 TDs. Was AJ Green's production more valuable to its team, yes but Q still had a better individual season at least statistically._________________

You just said a little while ago that it wasn't more impressive, but now it's better? Why? Because he got thrown the ball more because his team was awful, had to pass because they were always behind, and thus threw him the ball a ton? There's a reason his numbers weren't actually good when they won. I really just need to walk away. It's like talking to a brick wall. Seriously, what is your argument beyond the fact that Q had more yards? Because that only happened because of how much more he was thrown the ball.

So impressive means better? I didnt know that. It doesnt matter if he was thrown the ball more, he was still a rookie and was highly productive. I dont know why the amount of targets should be used against him because he still had over 300 yards more and almost 40 more receptions. AJ Green was more impressive because he had a rookie QB throwing him the ball but Q still had a better season - i dont know why youre struggling to grasp that.

His team was awful? So were the texans before 2011 but we still considered Andre Johnson the best WR in football. So please tell me how that argument works. You really are not realising the content of your argument.

So you're saying a more impressive season can worse than a less impressive one? That just makes no sense to me. The more impressive season is the better season.

Are you even serious on the Andre Johnson question? The Texans were horrible? I mean they finished .500 or better from 2007-2009, which just so happens to be when people started ranking Andre Johnson so highly. As for what separates that from Boldin's rookie season, Johnson actually performed in wins, unlike Boldin. He's averaged 89.4 yards in wins compared to 70.5 yards in losses. How do you not understand the difference between that and Boldin averaging 51.5 yards in wins and 97.6 yards in losses? One of them is actually contributing to his teams success, while the other is just racking up stats in losses.

No a more impressive season doesnt always mean a better season. For example Julio Jones rookie season was more impressive than somebody like Stevie Johnson because he was a rookie and had no offseason but Stevie Johnson had a better year. Or Cam Newton's season was more impressive then somebody like Tony Romo because he played great for a rookie despite having no off season. See more impressive doesnt necessarily always mean better.

Maybe not horrible but they werent a good team, they were bad defensively. Also with boldin, is that his fault?are you saying they were garbage yards? Just because youre on a bad team, it doesnt mean youre not doing your job. He did his job for the most part but clearly his team was not so good. AJ Green isnt the only reason why the bengals were 8-8, i think its mostly to do with their defense. And also who is to say that some of AJ Green's yardage werent from garbage.
Im sorry you dont put up almost 1400 yards and over 100 receptions and not be impressed or not regard that as a better season than 1058 yards and 65 receptions with 7 TDs. Was AJ Green's production more valuable to its team, yes but Q still had a better individual season at least statistically.

I'll just leave the first part alone because clearly we have a fundamental disagreement there.

I'm not saying it's Boldin's fault his team was horrible. I'm saying he took advantage of the fact that his team was horrible to rack up better stats once defenses let off the gas. So yes, I'm saying they were garbage yards. How else do you explain the fact that he was far worse in wins than in losses? If he was so important to his team, why were they able to win when they struggled, but when he performed his best, they lost?

As for Green, sure, he probably had some yards from garbage, but he performed better in his teams wins and worse in their losses which is exactly what you expect for a player that is important to his team's success. It's pretty obvious he had far, far fewer garbage yards than Boldin did.

I'll just leave the first part alone because clearly we have a fundamental disagreement there.

I'm not saying it's Boldin's fault his team was horrible. I'm saying he took advantage of the fact that his team was horrible to rack up better stats once defenses let off the gas. So yes, I'm saying they were garbage yards. How else do you explain the fact that he was far worse in wins than in losses? If he was so important to his team, why were they able to win when they struggled, but when he performed his best, they lost?

As for Green, sure, he probably had some yards from garbage, but he performed better in his teams wins and worse in their losses which is exactly what you expect for a player that is important to his team's success. It's pretty obvious he had far, far fewer garbage yards than Boldin did.

Q still had a better individual season. But like i said, Green's season was more impressive.

I'll just leave the first part alone because clearly we have a fundamental disagreement there.

I'm not saying it's Boldin's fault his team was horrible. I'm saying he took advantage of the fact that his team was horrible to rack up better stats once defenses let off the gas. So yes, I'm saying they were garbage yards. How else do you explain the fact that he was far worse in wins than in losses? If he was so important to his team, why were they able to win when they struggled, but when he performed his best, they lost?

As for Green, sure, he probably had some yards from garbage, but he performed better in his teams wins and worse in their losses which is exactly what you expect for a player that is important to his team's success. It's pretty obvious he had far, far fewer garbage yards than Boldin did.

Q still had a better individual season. But like i said, Green's season was more impressive.

Can we agree to disagree?

No because I don't decide which season is best based purely or raw statistics.

I mean if you're saying can we agree to disagree on how to rank what season is best that's fine, but for someone who claims not to rely on stats to determine who is best, you sure seem to rely on stats a lot to determine who was best.

You know, I think that one thing that stands out is that Green worked with Calvin over the offseason to get better, not Calvin with Green, instead Green with Calvin. Thats one thing that really stands out to me in this argument._________________

No because I don't decide which season is best based purely or raw statistics.

I mean if you're saying can we agree to disagree on how to rank what season is best that's fine, but for someone who claims not to rely on stats to determine who is best, you sure seem to rely on stats a lot to determine who was best.

They were both rookies! Its not like we are comparing a vet to a rookie. I admitted that AJ Green was more valuable to his team but individually he had a better season. Youre the one that brought up that AJ Green's rookie season was comparable to Q's rookie season on "raw bulk stats". Anquan Boldin played where CBs were able to actually touch receivers. How is that for not using stats. You also brought up how AJ Green was more productive with in wins than Q. So your argument is filled with hypocrisy._________________

You know, I think that one thing that stands out is that Green worked with Calvin over the offseason to get better, not Calvin with Green, instead Green with Calvin. Thats one thing that really stands out to me in this argument.

How?

Why wouldn't Green want to work out with Calvin? He is a veteran and the best WR in the league...Green is a young player with a butt load of talent. Why not learn from the best? Eventually the apprentice will overthrow the master, though

You know, I think that one thing that stands out is that Green worked with Calvin over the offseason to get better, not Calvin with Green, instead Green with Calvin. Thats one thing that really stands out to me in this argument.

It's an aspect of AJ Green that I like a lot. He worked out with Julio before the draft and this offseason he wanted to work out with Megatron and Fitz. Megatron to improve his work outs and Fitz to improve his route running. Don't think him and Fitz meet up though.

I see no problem is striving to get better and learning from the best..._________________

Hokie wrote:

Yall remember that one time Burifict made a tackle and didn't have to leave the game? Good times.

No a more impressive season doesnt always mean a better season. For example Julio Jones rookie season was more impressive than somebody like Stevie Johnson because he was a rookie and had no offseason but Stevie Johnson had a better year. Or Cam Newton's season was more impressive then somebody like Tony Romo because he played great for a rookie despite having no off season. See more impressive doesnt necessarily always mean better.

Maybe not horrible but they werent a good team, they were bad defensively. Also with boldin, is that his fault?are you saying they were garbage yards? Just because youre on a bad team, it doesnt mean youre not doing your job. He did his job for the most part but clearly his team was not so good. AJ Green isnt the only reason why the bengals were 8-8, i think its mostly to do with their defense. And also who is to say that some of AJ Green's yardage werent from garbage.
Im sorry you dont put up almost 1400 yards and over 100 receptions and not be impressed or not regard that as a better season than 1058 yards and 65 receptions with 7 TDs. Was AJ Green's production more valuable to its team, yes but Q still had a better individual season at least statistically.

Boldin also had a veteran QB throwing him the ball and he was coming into the season after having a full training camp to get the playbook down and improve his skills set.

AJ Green had a rookie QB who was developing as the season went along and had to start his rookie season without rookie and training camps to aid in his development. Include the fact that Dalton similarly didn't have any camps to aid him. Green also elevated his team- with help- from a bottom five team to a playoff team in a stacked division.

So sure Q' had more yards receiving and more receptions, but from an individual standpoint, Green's overall impact was greater than anything Q' was able to accomplish. Green was on pace for about 1170 yds receiving and 8 TDs. Also consider the fact that Green played in the AFCN, which judging based off of passing average against fielded the #1 (Pitt), #3 (BAL), and #5 (CLE) passing defenses in the NFL (as an aside Cincy was #7). If we go by yds/game we're talking the #1, #2, and #4 units... if we go by passing touchdowns allowed, we're talking the #1, #2, and #4 units.

So what is all of this to say? Well AJ Green posted his numbers... that made him only 8th all time to achieve that milestone as a rookie... while playing against the best passing defenses in the league. He put up those numbers while being covered by the likes of Ike Taylor, Lardarius Webb, and Joe Haden... plus the extra man he saw from double teams.

So you can continue to spew off about how "statistically" Boldin was more impressive, but when you look at the fact that he for 6 of his games he got to go up against middling pass defense units of #13, #15, and #21 (passing average)... or #22, #26, and #27 (passing TDs allowed), and #12, #17, and #27 (passing yards allowed). Boldin was clearly playing against inferior defensive talent for AT LEAST 6 games in the season.

So not only did Boldin have the benefit of training camp, but he had the benefit of middle of average to below average defensive units to feast on for a 1/3 of his production at minimum. Whereas Green was playing against the best of the best... and he still produced big.

I think it's simply ignorant to make a blank statement like, "player 'a' had better stats than player 'b', therefore he had the better individual season". In so many cases and in so many sports you'll see guys with inferior numbers win MVPs over guys who had the better numbers because they were more impactful players and anyone who saw them play could see that. If not for Rodgers efficiency stats last season one could've said, Brady and Brees were screwed for not getting the MVP award because of their insane numbers... yet clearly if you watched the games you can see that even on an individual basis, Rodgers had the better season. Sometimes bulk stats aren't everything... and in the case of AJ Green, that is most certainly the case. AJ Green played at the very least a level of play that could get him put into the elite conversation as a rookie (meaning top 8 kind of play)... and coming into this season, he's been balling at a clearly elite level. He clearly has the resume to be considered an elite WR from this point forward, until proven otherwise._________________